Ammaiyappan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :16.09.2025 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy AMMAIYAPPAN .. Petitioner Vs.
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR NAMAKKAL DISTRICT 2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER NAMAKKAL DISTRICT 3 THE THASILDAR NAMAKKAL TALUK NAMAKKAL DISTRICT 4 S. GANDHI
...Respondents
Prayer Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2025 within a time frame fixed by this Honble Court For Petitioner : M/s/E.Yuvarani For Respondents 1to3 : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate 1/5
Order Heard M/s/E.Yuvarani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja, learned Government Advocate who takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Since the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself and considering the nature of order that is to be passed herein, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with.
2. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition praying for the issuance of a mandamus on the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on his representation dated 04.08.2025.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and his brother are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated at Vasanthapuram Village, Namakkal Taluk, Namakkal District; that the petitioner approached the revenue officials for issuance of joint patta in the name of the petitioner and his brother, but, on account of 2/5
the mistake committed by the third respondent, patta has been granted in favour of the fourth respondent, who has no right over the property; that upon discovering the error, the petitioner made a detailed representation dated 04.08.2025 to the second respondent and requested him to rectify the said error and to issue joint patta in the names of the petitioner and his brother, however, the said representation evoked no response, which necessitated the petitioner to approach this Court by way of present Writ Petition seeking for aforesaid prayer.
4. The learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 fairly submitted that the representation made by the petitioner would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law within the time as stipulated by this Court.
5. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 and considering the limited scope of the prayer, sought for by the petitioner, in this Writ Petition, this Court, without expressing any view with regard to the merits of the contentions putforth by 3/5
the petitioner either in the Writ Petition or in the representation, is of the view that, suffice it would be to direct the second respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation in a time bound manner.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 04.08.2025 and dispose of the same as early as possible, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving due notice to the parties concerned. No costs. 16.09.2025 sd Index : yes/no To 1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR NAMAKKAL DISTRICT 2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER NAMAKKAL DISTRICT 3 THE THASILDAR NAMAKKAL TALUK NAMAKKAL DISTRICT 4/5
Krishnan Ramasamy,J., sd 16.09.2025 5/5